Hacker News Reader

Comment by bad_user | Hacker News Reader

If you'll read the announcement, it's pretty clear that Google+ names must pass a review process. And in case the name is "flagged", then you must provide:

     - References to an established identity offline in 
       print media, news articles, etc

     - Scanned official documentation, such as a 
       driver’s license

     - Proof of an established identity online with a 
       meaningful following

By giving a bogus name, you'll end up losing your online Google+ identity and access to other Google services, such as Gmail.

View on HN

Wasn't it established that a bogus name would not make you lose access to gmail/docs/etc?

Well, considering how some kids lost their Gmail account after signing up for Google+ and told the truth about their age, I wouldn't count on it.

That's COPPA, though.

You could argue that they should be supporting accounts for kids under 13 with parental permission (like Yahoo does, for instance), but that's not the same thing.

Edit: and to preempt some class of responses: yes, as has been covered on HN before, COPPA has a clause that says not to warn users that setting their age to under 13 will prevent them from accessing content, and that you can't (generally) let them go back and change it later.

Also the kid in that discussion was from the Netherlands, where COPPA doesn't apply.

Actually, COPPA is formulated in a way so that the nationality of the kid doesn't matter, only the nationality of the company.

Yeah, but why take away the access to Gmail?

If Facebook/Twitter bans you, you don't lose access to Gmail. It makes no sense.

I don't understand. It is an argument for diversifying providers for email, social networking, etc, but, in this case, gmail/COPPA requires you to be over 13, so if google knows (or thinks it knows) a user is under 13, this does seem like the expected outcome. Am I missing your point?

Google is a single company, and just finds it easier to ban you completely from their entire network than to let you have access in piecemeal to certain services.

A company can't ban a user from one service because they believe they're underage (to comply with COPA), then pretend to not know they should be banned from other services of the company where COPA would also apply.

It's not "easier" to do that, it's just what you have to do since it's so difficult to make any social / messaging service COPA-compliant.

I inititially wrote just that but changed it....

I'm not sure that COPPA applies to GMail. Certainly, Yahoo mail doesn't stop me from entering a birth-date under the age of 13 when signing up for it.

Yahoo will let you create the account, but then you'll have to go through a whole set of other steps to create a COPPA-compliant email account, including having a parent provide a credit card.

That's different from how they would handle it if they had an existing account on Yahoo Mail and found out that the owner was less than 13 - I suspect they would have to turn it off as well, because they won't let you create a non-COPPA account once you've admitted you're under 13.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com